cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/575485
R-selection is like having 1000 offsprings, whereas k-selection is like having only 1.
I heard a variation applied to humans in a psychology textbook about how abused humans are more likely to have more kids than unabused and cannot find the name of this theory
Sounds like a mixing up of two theories: the idea that childhood abuse leads to promiscuity later in life[1] (a purely psychological effect of unclear severity) with the differential-K theory[2], a discredited theory[3] from the 80s that postulated that human individuals and populations have genetic variations in the “K factor”, which leads to differences in child rearing and lifetime success outcome such as criminality:
The theory was used to promote racism and eugenics, and its scientific foundations have since been discredited. Also the researcher who proposed it turned out to have a conflict of interest:
In any case, r/K selection was supposed to be governed by genetics, something a human already has and can’t be changed during a lifetime. To claim that something that happens during childhood changes the “K factor” is neo-Lamarckism, unless it’s claimed to be an epigenetic effect like transgenerational trauma:[5]
But such epigenetic human effects are also currently disputed.
https://www.medicaldaily.com/does-childhood-sex-abuse-lead-promiscuity-later-or-only-myth-317060 ↩︎
https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(85)90137-0 ↩︎
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_K_theory ↩︎
https://psychology.uwo.ca/people/faculty/remembrance/rushton.html ↩︎
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_trauma#Epigenetic_mechanisms ↩︎